Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE OOC Summit => Topic started by: Mitara Newelle on 30 Jan 2013, 13:36
-
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2539775#post2539775
/me looks out over her herd and cues Judas Priest
:(
-
♥ Falcon
-
I think commoner is the key there.
-
/me golf claps.
-
Don't let this ruin anything for you. If your character needs to own slaves for story reasons and has enough money it wouldn't be -that- difficult to buy a small title of holdership; you can probably find many many ways of working this backstory in if you really need to.
-
why outlaws ?
-
Im not sure of the problem?
You have to be a Holder to own slaves, thats kinda been PF for awhile. In fact, in my view they kinda threw a lot of RPers a bone, since now theyve explained how commoners can "own" slaves. (with Custodial Servitude Contract).
Im sure a capsuleer could pay off any number of Holders for the right to "own" slaves.
-
As baseliners, yeah I understand that only Holders were allowed to own slaves, but that got a little murkier as a capsuleer.
I suppose Mit may have to quickly 'purchase' a small Holdership, disperse her herd, or run with the Custodial Servitude Contract thing.
-
As baseliners, yeah I understand that only Holders were allowed to own slaves, but that got a little murkier as a capsuleer.
I suppose Mit may have to quickly 'purchase' a small Holdership, disperse her herd, or run with the Custodial Servitude Contract thing.
Well, if you do disperse your slave herd, I will offer 100 ISK, 50 strippers, and 100 bottles of booze for your manservant/hairstylist slave named "Aldrith".
-
What Gotti said.
According to PF, there are 3 types of people allowed to own slaves :
- Amarrian (and Khanid) Holders, the ones taking care of the slaves and employing them. They are nobles.
- Slavers, the ones to enslave, but unallowed to do a Holder's job. They merely enslave, or buy and sell. They are merchants.
- The Ammatar slave owners oddity : Ammatar nobles with an implicit right similar to Holder's powers and accreditations, including owning slaves.
-
Just go outlaw. It's easier than keeping up with PF changes. :yar:
-
A few grams of retconium and a smidge of handwavium is completely justified here to take this into account for your characters. No one should give you grief if you edit to accomodate this information.
-
I blame Imperial Customs for not saying anything to me!!!
:(
-
As baseliners, yeah I understand that only Holders were allowed to own slaves, but that got a little murkier as a capsuleer.
I suppose Mit may have to quickly 'purchase' a small Holdership, disperse her herd, or run with the Custodial Servitude Contract thing.
Well, if you do disperse your slave herd, I will offer 100 ISK, 50 strippers, and 100 bottles of booze for your manservant/hairstylist slave named "Aldrith".
Hmmm.... tempting
:D
( Not really though :p )
-
Don't get cheated Mitty, I'm worth way more in strippers than that.
Like a lot.
I'm talking a mountain of them. A mountain made of strippers.
-
I thought it was always known that only Holders can own slaves :?:
-
Don't get cheated Mitty, I'm worth way more in strippers than that.
Like a lot.
I'm talking a mountain of them. A mountain made of strippers.
Lord Vaari, the Golden Mountain.
Lord Aldrith, the Gyrating Mountain.
-
I thought it was always known that only Holders can own slaves :?:
That was my impression as well. I'm actually kind of happy that something I suspected, ie: contracting out of slave labor, is something that exists.
-
I'm fairly impressed with the MIO showing up in that thread, actually.
-
Indeed, for established Amarr characters a little handwavium can fix this - no biggie. The problem it presents has more to do with the boundaries between baseliner and capsuleer economies, and who is responsible for them.
i.e., going back to the recent Ammatar thing, does this now mean that the vast majority of slaves sold by the Ammatar onto the capsuleer market are illegal sales? If so, would the Mandate or its corporations be legally accountable for selling to an uncontrolled marketplace instead of going through proper legal channels?
-
I think Amarr Civil Service sells slaves on the capsuleer market too. I don't think it's something unique to the Mandate. Again though that's more to do with the boundary between baseline and capsuleer economies. It would be interesting though if nebulous laws in the Mandate were a source of illegally acquired slaves in the Empire.
-
It is not the slavery thing here that is interesting.
It is the fact that the capsuleer was referred to as a commoner.
Basically meaning that there is no special place for the capsuleer in the Amarrian hierarchy above a commoner.
Also, being a Holder is not a small thing.
There is an oath involved, there is the fact that you will be part of the feudal system as someone who people will owe fealthy to and someone you as a Holder will owe fealthy to.
It is not just a title that can be 'purchased' for a bit.
It is a life long commitment.
I guess that is why the Custodial Service Contract was created in the first place.
So that people with oodles of money could have slaves.
The specifics of the Contract would be really interesting.
Who can it be given to?
Do they still have the obligation to Reclaim the slaves?
Is there obvious loopholes?
Schtuff like dat.
-
I think Amarr Civil Service sells slaves on the capsuleer market too. I don't think it's something unique to the Mandate. Again though that's more to do with the boundary between baseline and capsuleer economies. It would be interesting though if nebulous laws in the Mandate were a source of illegally acquired slaves in the Empire.
There are a few Amarr corps that do, but I was just using the Mandate as an example because of the recent event highlighting that nebulous boundary. It's something that's going to need to get resolved, I think.
-
It is not the slavery thing here that is interesting.
It is the fact that the capsuleer was referred to as a commoner.
Basically meaning that there is no special place for the capsuleer in the Amarrian hierarchy above a commoner.
Also, being a Holder is not a small thing.
There is an oath involved, there is the fact that you will be part of the feudal system as someone who people will owe fealthy to and someone you as a Holder will owe fealthy to.
It is not just a title that can be 'purchased' for a bit.
It is a life long commitment.
I guess that is why the Custodial Service Contract was created in the first place.
So that people with oodles of money could have slaves.
The specifics of the Contract would be really interesting.
Who can it be given to?
Do they still have the obligation to Reclaim the slaves?
Is there obvious loopholes?
Schtuff like dat.
Arcturus referred to himself as one, in that his father worked -for- a Holder, so it seems appropriate for the MIO to address him as a commoner.
Capsuleer's place in Amarr society is more nebulous, as it probably matters more who your family is and your personal rung on the food chain, rather than the capsuleer part.
I do feel small titles of nobility would not be difficult with the right resources and pressure, however. In our own history those things were often given out like hotcakes when Nobility needed cash infusions, or as rewards for service, etc.
-
Lallara, I think the OP in the thread implied himself to be a commoner. I don't think the MIO actor was implying that all capsuleers are automatically commoners.
Other than that I agree on all points.
-
Yeah, I could see holdership given out something along the lines of being knighted by the next holder up in rank to you. Of course you'll always be lower on the pole then that holder, unless a higher up holder raises you up.
-
Right, let's also not forget there's a Crusade on; nothing says 'nice job killing heathens' like a few lordships handed out to good officers.
-
I was under the impression capsuleers could own slaves as well, hence my having them. There was nothing stopping me from buying them, nor was I stopped by any authorities during transport.
Hopefully the MIO agent gets back to me with some more detail. Upon further thought I don't think Mit would keep slaves just as custodial crew, nor would she feel right about buying into nobility(granted title would be another thing entirely, but I don't see that happening), so my options are narrowing.
-
I was under the impression capsuleers could own slaves as well, hence my having them. There was nothing stopping me from buying them, nor was I stopped by any authorities during transport.
Hopefully the MIO agent gets back to me with some more detail. Upon further thought I don't think Mit would keep slaves just as custodial crew, nor would she feel right about buying into nobility(granted title would be another thing entirely, but I don't see that happening), so my options are narrowing.
Decorated holy warriors of PIE with years of service and bringing all the love and good-good feelings and positive press to the faithful with their exploits? I could almost guarantee PIE membership would have been tossed all sorts of titles from small and larger holders alike.
-
I'd also be interested to know if slaves can be owned by an entity or organization rather than just individual Holders. What about corprately-owned slaves? I'm sure PIE Inc. would employ a few tens of thousands at least.
-
I thought it was always known that only Holders can own slaves :?:
Think it's from the other perspective. If only Holders can legally own Slaves and Commoners are expressly Forbidden from Holding Slaves, then logically it would imply that a Commoner cannot be a Holder, only those holding Noble Title.
Therefore, any Commoner claiming to be a Holder and keeping Slaves is therefore in breach of Ammarian Law. In the Eyes of the Empire, the Law is the Word of God. I think you can imagine the Amarrian reaction to someone blatantly going against the Word of God.
It's also a big can of Worms for any Non-Amarrian trying to claim they are a Holder of the Amarrian Faith.
Edit: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Holders - Evelopedia Article on Holders : Some interesting snippets there on just how powerful the Title of Holder is.
-
I'd also be interested to know if slaves can be owned by an entity or organization rather than just individual Holders. What about corprately-owned slaves? I'm sure PIE Inc. would employ a few tens of thousands at least.
I would imagine they could be contracted out to an corporation or such, no big deal.
Though, the whole concept of slavery in the Empire is based upon being taught a path to God by an enlightened individual. Not sure an entity could outright own a slave, just be their custodian.
-
I thought it was always known that only Holders can own slaves :?:
Think it's from the other perspective. If only Holders can legally own Slaves and Commoners are expressly Forbidden from Holding Slaves, then logically it would imply that a Commoner cannot be a Holder, only those holding Noble Title.
Therefore, any Commoner claiming to be a Holder and keeping Slaves is therefore in breach of Ammarian Law. In the Eyes of the Empire, the Law is the Word of God. I think you can imagine the Amarrian reaction to someone blatantly going against the Word of God.
It's also a big can of Worms for any Non-Amarrian trying to claim they are a Holder of the Amarrian Faith.
Actually, there isn't anything saying a Commoner in Amarr society cannot be a Holder. It's actually quite possible that a commoner, probably from the wealthy family stock, could be given the Holder title from higher authority. Thing is, only certain bloodlines are more likely to be chosen to be promoted in this way, mostly likely being the True Amarr and then followed by the Khanid.
I think in Mitara's case, it could happen, but she'd be one of the rare Ni-Kunni holders that PF talks about.
-
Having some title and a holdership are two different things. I think going at this with an inflation of retconned elevations to holdership somewhen in the past isn't the right way. There is especially the difference between holdership and nobility to be considered: "Though all Holders are nobility, it is not true that all nobility are Holders. A holder's entire family, even distant cousins and aunts and uncles, are considered nobility, but only the title owner himself is considered a Holder." (I think it's a misconception that holders are called holders because they hold slaves, rather it's people who are in charge of a holding, that is who have land and the right to judge and make law in that domain. There were holders even before the Amarr started to practice slavery, after all.)
So, the number of holders matches the number of holdings, safe for destitute holders. As holdership gets usually passed on by hereditary means the chance to get hold over a destitue holdership is pretty slim, unless one gets adopted, first in line to inherit and the holder dies. All other freshly made holders should - imho - rather busy them selves to keep their holdings in order than playing capsuleer, as if one is raised to holdership, then this is because someone thinks you are able to look after that holding and expect you just to do that and prove yourself by doing so.
So, I think those Amarr, that don't have already the background as nobility fare better with the possibilities that CSCs offer. After all, if you have the trust of a holder he can charge you with buying/selling/educating/freeing his slaves in his name, which makes you fapp the one 'owning' the slave. (Just be careful not to sell his lordships favourite slave. ;) ) If you're also a certified slaver, you can even buy and sell slaves in your own right (though prolly not free them, as I understood it).
I think it makes good sense that in the Empire legal ownership of slaves is quite restricted.
Also: A commoner can't be a holder, by definition. A commoner might be elevated to holder status - but than he ceases to be a commoner.
-
The Empire is so huge that there's bound to be regional differences. It doesn't seem far-fetched that some of the royal families (the Tash Murkons come to mind) might allow extremely wealthy (and otherwise politically uncontroversial) individuals to buy fiefs and with them status as Holders.
-
Also: A commoner can't be a holder, by definition. A commoner might be elevated to holder status - but than he ceases to be a commoner.
Yeah this definitely.
There was a trend within the RP community for a while (which I immensely disliked) of splitting holders into two categories
Holders (uppercase) being actual nobility
holders (lowercase) being anyone that held slaves.
This always bothered me, and I'm rather glad to see the PF didn't go in that direction.
-
from the wiki entry:
"Occasionally, a commoner may be elevated to the rank of Holder. This typically occurs when the commoner has done a great service to the Empire or is of such wealth, distinction, and renown that it would be foolish to deny them. War heroes are among the most frequent commoners to be granted entry into the Holder class, a fact the Imperial Navy uses to its full advantage in recruitment."
-
Sounds like every member of PIE would qualify to me. Holder titles all around!
-
Nah.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris.
As far as I can tell PIE is more about selfless service to the Empire as a Guardian of the Empire and a Defender of the Faith, and those have not been high on the list of nobility... ever.
They're more of a class of warriors, not heroes.
-
Ya, PIE are more an order of paladins.
Social status should not be implied.
-
I must admit I liked the MIO intervention, brought a lot of things on the table to discuss. :)
I do feel small titles of nobility would not be difficult with the right resources and pressure, however. In our own history those things were often given out like hotcakes when Nobility needed cash infusions, or as rewards for service, etc.
That depends on the place and the time. In XVIth century Spain, for example, a noble would rather not eat than look like he can't do well, much less sell his title! For an example, check out the "Lazarillo de Tormes" book which features such a character. In truth, most titles weren't actually on sale until around the XVIIIth century in most places.
Right, let's also not forget there's a Crusade on; nothing says 'nice job killing heathens' like a few lordships handed out to good officers.
I see this as quite more probable, and still don't remember any such things happening inside EVE PF. Medals yes, but no lordships.
I'd also be interested to know if slaves can be owned by an entity or organization rather than just individual Holders. What about corprately-owned slaves? I'm sure PIE Inc. would employ a few tens of thousands at least.
Agreed. The Ordo had its Legio afterall, so I'd like to see if such a thing was a big contradiction of PF at the time or not. :D
Lots of stuff
I can't agree more.
-
I have to agree with Nicoletta in thinking that a bunch of retconning might be iffy, particularly if your character is of a bloodline that doesn't often have a noble title (Ni-Kunni and Ammatar come to mind). That being said, if you are an Amarrian loyalist capsuleer, chances are your character has sworn fealty to a Holder. What with your wealth and undying service to the Faith and all, your character could probably tug on the Holder they've pledged fealty to in order to initiate one of these Custodial Servitude Contract dealies. Of course it's also quite possible your character refuses to swear fealty to anyone but the Empress herself, in which case you might run into issues trying to explain why your character has slaves.
There is also the second possibility of certain laws somehow not applying to capsuleers. Mechanicslly, at least, the only laws you can get penalized for not following are CONCORD laws. I've always viewed capsuleers (at least, the kind player characters are) as being pretty much supra-national (or is "transnational" a better term?), with any loyalties being of their own accord.
-
There is also the second possibility of certain laws somehow not applying to capsuleers. Mechanicslly, at least, the only laws you can get penalized for not following are CONCORD laws. I've always viewed capsuleers (at least, the kind player characters are) as being pretty much supra-national (or is "transnational" a better term?), with any loyalties being of their own accord.
Yeah, I think this is the case. And the recent taking of slaves by EM in the Ammatar space would be in this line, as they used this to get them and then move them around.
-
That depends on the place and the time. In XVIth century Spain, for example, a noble would rather not eat than look like he can't do well, much less sell his title! For an example, check out the "Lazarillo de Tormes" book which features such a character. In truth, most titles weren't actually on sale until around the XVIIIth century in most places.
Actual transfer of a title from one person to another isn't always what it's about, though. The issuing of completely new titles is always a possibility. On the subject of Spain in the 16th century, that was the time in which it began to grow into a colonial power. I can't be bothered to trawl for sources right now, but I imagine that there were several cases throughout that century where petty nobles and even enterprising commoners were given holdings and titles in the new overseas territories, without anyone back in Spain proper having to give up their own title first.
-
The question of why are some Amarr NPC corps selling slaves on the capsuleer market bothers me too.
I think I may ask to an actor if I do not forget.
Nah.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris.
As far as I can tell PIE is more about selfless service to the Empire as a Guardian of the Empire and a Defender of the Faith, and those have not been high on the list of nobility... ever.
They're more of a class of warriors, not heroes.
It mostly depends what PIE want eventually, but modest heroes that do want to remain modest are sometimes forced to accept rewards and titles by political and public pressure.
I'd also be interested to know if slaves can be owned by an entity or organization rather than just individual Holders. What about corprately-owned slaves? I'm sure PIE Inc. would employ a few tens of thousands at least.
Sure they are. Amarr Navy and the likes come to mind.
Or they just borrow them to actual Holders, creating interesting private <-> public contracts like the one described here.
I have to agree with Nicoletta in thinking that a bunch of retconning might be iffy, particularly if your character is of a bloodline that doesn't often have a noble title (Ni-Kunni and Ammatar come to mind).
Actually the Ammatars are part of the few bloodlines in the greater Empire that have a high number of Holders, much like the Khanid. The difference being that they do not technically own the title and the law is very vague around it. They just do it because it is tolerated, and that comes from a tradition induced by war necessities dating back to the Minmatar Rebellion.
-
PIE rejected my application. Therefore, theyre meanies.
-
Meanies can get titles, too. :D
-
I could assume that, like the contract hinted by the NPC, knighthoods and/or religious orders could keep slaves essentially in trust in the name of a Holder or other authority acting as a kind of a "fount of honour". Or rather, a "tap of honour", ultimately tracing his authority back to the Sacred Throne via a Heir - "church" institutions would probably consider the Emperor to be their patron, and have her authoricy channeled via the leader, who may or may not be a Holder by his or her own right.
As for corporations, still would need a Holder patron, who would make a contract, probably a trade between responsibilities on taking care of the slaves in return for a share of their work. Whether or not religious education is the responsibility of the corporation or the Holder would, then, depends on the contracts.
As for player Holders, we may be nearly certain that several PIE Admirals - Golan Trevize would perhaps be amongst the best bets as a receiver of the Cross of the Sacred Throne and the Mamet 500. Memory would indicate that Golan is also Ni-Kunni, though a quick search revealed only that Siobhan's manner of dress in probably not Righteous.
-
PIE rejected my application. Therefore, theyre meanies.
Its ok Ava, just keep trying.
I belieb n u!
-
PIE rejected my application. Therefore, theyre meanies.
"Admiral Mitara Newelle-Shutaq, CEO PIE Inc, Rejecter of Starfire, Meanie."
I like it! :)
-
Also: A commoner can't be a holder, by definition. A commoner might be elevated to holder status - but than he ceases to be a commoner.
Yeah this definitely.
There was a trend within the RP community for a while (which I immensely disliked) of splitting holders into two categories
Holders (uppercase) being actual nobility
holders (lowercase) being anyone that held slaves.
This always bothered me, and I'm rather glad to see the PF didn't go in that direction.
Why did it bother you ?
-
Also: A commoner can't be a holder, by definition. A commoner might be elevated to holder status - but than he ceases to be a commoner.
Yeah this definitely.
There was a trend within the RP community for a while (which I immensely disliked) of splitting holders into two categories
Holders (uppercase) being actual nobility
holders (lowercase) being anyone that held slaves.
This always bothered me, and I'm rather glad to see the PF didn't go in that direction.
Why did it bother you ?
I felt like it cheapened the title of actual Holder. There were a lot of pirates and outlaws and cultists and so forth claiming to be holders because they owned slaves, and that just struck me as weakening the status of people who actually wanted to RP Amarrian holders.
-
Also: A commoner can't be a holder, by definition. A commoner might be elevated to holder status - but than he ceases to be a commoner.
Yeah this definitely.
There was a trend within the RP community for a while (which I immensely disliked) of splitting holders into two categories
Holders (uppercase) being actual nobility
holders (lowercase) being anyone that held slaves.
This always bothered me, and I'm rather glad to see the PF didn't go in that direction.
Why did it bother you ?
I felt like it cheapened the title of actual Holder. There were a lot of pirates and outlaws and cultists and so forth claiming to be holders because they owned slaves, and that just struck me as weakening the status of people who actually wanted to RP Amarrian holders.
Pirates, outlaws, and cultists can only be former holders by definition, and would certainly not have legal titles to own those kinds of things. Not that that's ever stopped anyone...
-
Well, I'm seeing people acting like they're going to use this as a stick to beat Leopold Caine with.
And indeed, to beat other players with, arguing that they aren't Holders, or should be busy on their estate, rather than being in space.
So, I'm not yet convinced this is good for RP.
-
Like I said, small handwavium is completely valid when PF is amended and clarified.
I will support anyone who needs to make retcons for this.
-
Is anyone not going to go along with a retcon? Even I'm not that much of an asshole, and I'm a goon.
Wait a second . . . .
To all involved. Welcome to the nobility. Remember, whip your slaves daily to ensure good obedience. Oh, and follow Grange's example, if someone does something wrong, mass executions are warranted.
-
Well, I'm seeing people acting like they're going to use this as a stick to beat Leopold Caine with.
And indeed, to beat other players with, arguing that they aren't Holders, or should be busy on their estate, rather than being in space.
So, I'm not yet convinced this is good for RP.
I'd imagine that non-noble Amarr capsuleers owning slaves is something the Empire would typically turn a blind eye to, despite it technically being illegal. Similar to the Ammatar Mandate, where it only became partially legal after years of simply being ignored by the Holders/Imperial government (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Slavery#Slave_Owners). Therefore, there wouldn't really need to be a retcon for such individuals. If they really wanted to be proper legal slave owners without being nobility, then the Custodial Servitude Contract seems like a pretty easy fix for that. About the only thing they can't do is refer to themselves as actual Holders... a better name would probably be Custodian. Though I imagine the holder title could still be tossed about informally.
As for "should be on their estate", one would assume that any Holder would have significant administrative staff, and that the Holder can easily delegate the direct governing to his staff. Afterall, capsuleers can already manage planetary colonies from space, no reason a Holder capsuleer can't do the same with their own holdings. Could even use a planetary colony in-game to represent a minor holding.
Additionally, it is stated that Holders spend the majority of their time managing their private business ventures... something many capsuleers are likewise doing.
-
No need to do anything, I'd say.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Holders
Traditionally, Holders are the sole legal owners of slaves within the Empire. However, the situation has become significantly murkier in recent years.
Many capsuleers of Amarr descent use slave crews and others regularly engage in the slave trade and slave ownership. Some have privately grumbled about the erosion of Holder rights and responsibilities, but others have welcomed the increased revenue provided by capsuleers in purchasing slaves.
Holders also occasionally sell individual holdings and titles in order to finance businesses or cover debts. They can also be transferred as the result of legal grievances. Holders can willingly transfer titles to other members of the nobility. Though such acts always require the approval of their ruling Heirs, such things are typically granted as a matter of course.
I don't believe the quote from the MIO actor affects anything to an extent requiring large retcon actions to be taken. The MIO actor is only stating the traditional position.
-
I've often wondered how the concept of Godflesh would affect being a capsuleer Holder in the Empire.
I always thought capsuleers due to being cloned were generally regarded as something to almost be abhorred and reviled in the Empire? How do such people then become Holders and expected to be religious and holy when others think they are impure?
Even Jamyl Sarum had to construct the whole, "Returned from the dead not through cloning but God's miracle" line just to sit on the throne, right?
-
I've often wondered how the concept of Godflesh would affect being a capsuleer Holder in the Empire.
I always thought capsuleers due to being cloned were generally regarded as something to almost be abhorred and reviled in the Empire? How do such people then become Holders and expected to be religious and holy when others think they are impure?
Even Jamyl Sarum had to construct the whole, "Returned from the dead not through cloning but God's miracle" line just to sit on the throne, right?
I was under the impression this only went so far - that is, Emperor/Empress, Heirs, directly below Heirs, directly below the below Heirs, and maybe one more link down.
Once you get to "I am the holder of a Small city and a minor region on this here planet ruling a couple million people" are you really Nobility in the full sense? You are definitely not royalty, but do you have to be a Noble to be a Holder? Are the two the same, Nobles losing nobility when not holders, Holders gaining Nobility when they become Holders, etc.
As an example, Jesmine believed her soul to be lost after being podded in combat (She graduated long before the 'you get popped in the noob-quests' thing came along) and had back-lashes due to this, but she was among the most minor of minor holders around, barely holding anything of any worth. Is the God-flesh doctrine Royalty-only or does it cover the nobility as well, and in that case, is everyone that hold the title of Holder also Nobles by default?
Also, a little of topic, I don't think any player that are not part of the Empire and claim to be Holders will be affected much by this, pro-Empire players would already claim that they are not proper holders or that they were rogue, all this will do is add some weight behind those claims. Said rogue Holders are still perfectly free to ignore their claims and go on with whatever ideas they want to hold to, regardless.
-
I've often wondered how the concept of Godflesh would affect being a capsuleer Holder in the Empire.
I always thought capsuleers due to being cloned were generally regarded as something to almost be abhorred and reviled in the Empire? How do such people then become Holders and expected to be religious and holy when others think they are impure?
Even Jamyl Sarum had to construct the whole, "Returned from the dead not through cloning but God's miracle" line just to sit on the throne, right?
I was under the impression this only went so far - that is, Emperor/Empress, Heirs, directly below Heirs, directly below the below Heirs, and maybe one more link down.
Once you get to "I am the holder of a Small city and a minor region on this here planet ruling a couple million people" are you really Nobility in the full sense? You are definitely not royalty, but do you have to be a Noble to be a Holder? Are the two the same, Nobles losing nobility when not holders, Holders gaining Nobility when they become Holders, etc.
As an example, Jesmine believed her soul to be lost after being podded in combat (She graduated long before the 'you get popped in the noob-quests' thing came along) and had back-lashes due to this, but she was among the most minor of minor holders around, barely holding anything of any worth. Is the God-flesh doctrine Royalty-only or does it cover the nobility as well, and in that case, is everyone that hold the title of Holder also Nobles by default?
The decree is for royal flesh only (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Sacred_Flesh), namely the Emperor and the heirs. It doesn't apply to anyone below that, even Holders. Though I imagine it "trickles down" such that those beneath them would still see cloning as impure and would want to emulate the decree in order to be closer to God. But the only ones the actual decree itself applies to are royalty.
Also, all Holders are nobility. Even minor Holders would still be nobility. As would their offspring and immediate family, as you only have to be related to a Holder to be nobility. It's a feudal structure, just with much fewer titles. Being nobility doesn't mean you're wealthy or powerful, it just means you are of high birth--that is, born into a Holder family.
Holders and nobility
Though all Holders are nobility, it is not true that all nobility are Holders. A Holder's entire family, even distant cousins and aunts and uncles, are considered nobility, but only the title owner himself is considered a Holder. This is sensible, once the status of a Holder's children is considered. Only one can receive the title of Holder, but it would be unthinkable for the others to suddenly become commoners.
Such children are known as non-titled nobility. They frequently become theologians, professors, judges, military officers, or other acceptable noble lines of work. This is considered beneficial to the Holders, as their relations serve as important contacts within the Imperial bureaucracy.
Former Holders
A Holder can be stripped of his title for any number of crimes. These crimes are normally religious in nature, such as insulting the Empress[13], refusing an Imperial law[8], heresy, or any number of other offenses. Rarely, a Holder may be stripped of his title or demoted to a less prestigious title by an Heir for failure to adequately perform his duties.
A Holder who has been stripped of his title becomes a commoner, as does every member of his family. In the event the Holder has committed a heinous crime, he and his family may be enslaved. Former Holders are prized slaves among Holders, who view them as trophies.[10]
Due to there being only very few titled Holders in any immediate noble family, who rule over large swathes of territory, it's likely only a handful of slaves have actually met their Holder. Most slaves would have likely been spread out in custodianship to the Holder's various relatives and favored subjects. Which gives a lot of room for non-Holder slave owners.
-
Hadn't thought about how so many slaves wouldn't know their Holders, but it does make sense. :)
-
I doubt that the Holder Oath carries over Death.
Hence making people that have been cloned unable to hold to their oath of fealty through the process.
Unlike in 'more civilized' societies where your assets can be given to another legal entity for the duration of your death and delivered back to you after you unfortunate event.
I doubt that an Oath carries over.
Especially since there is no way of determining that there is the right informorph in the flesh bag.
The Godflesh taboo is probably from the time that the Amarrians dealt with the cloning issues back when they dealt with Takmahl heresies, where this exact problem rose up.
Who knows, maybe the Mad Emperor was some slave who jumped into his skin after he choked on a chicken bone?
-
It's been Clarified a bit with Regards to the Legality of Capsuleers holding Slaves
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2550701#post2550701
Quick Version would seem to be that it's legal for any Capsuleer, regardless of whether they're a Holder or Not, to own a Slave in the Empire because they can be purchased on the open SCC Market.
-
However, the lack of comment "on the social, moral, or ethical implications of capsuleers of non-Holder birth who own slaves" means it's rather frowned upon by proper Amarrian society.
Dirty eggers!
-
I think in the end the amount of holders and nobility is sort of still up in the air and open to wide regional interpretations. As has already been pointed out, real world historically speaking, there are cases of a noble land owner making tiny titles as rewards for service. A feudal system is practically designed for that to happen. So the Tash-Murkon family's heir and Holder might "hold" sway over the entire Tash-Murkon region while owing fealty to God, Empress, and Empire as a whole. Similarly the Tash-Murkon heir has probably divided the region up to Constellation level Holders, who might grant title to System Holders, who might grant title to Planetary/Orbital Holders, all the way down to small scale Continental or planetary region Holders. In each case the Holder above could be "sacrificing" part of their own holdings to give title to a trusted servant, creating a minor noble that would most likely be an ally in court, while also still being sworn to fealty to them.
It does seem entirely plausible to me. Heck there are probably instances throughout Amarrian history of some petty Holder elevating a subordinate out of spite to try and see them fail. Sort of giving them a horrible little Holding that is rife with problems. The Holder would essentially be washing his hands of the problems by being able to say he put someone else in charge of the area, so if the new little lord or lady fails it's no loss to the Holder and they get the gratification of putting an upstart in their place. Of course if this situation has occurred somewhere in the Empire, then it's possible albeit rare, that the new lord might succeed. For all we know this could be the story behind some of the truly bitter Holder feuds.
-
As baseliners, yeah I understand that only Holders were allowed to own slaves, but that got a little murkier as a capsuleer.
I suppose Mit may have to quickly 'purchase' a small Holdership, disperse her herd, or run with the Custodial Servitude Contract thing.
Well, if you do disperse your slave herd, I will offer 100 ISK, 50 strippers, and 100 bottles of booze for your manservant/hairstylist slave named "Aldrith".
I raise this offer to 1.000.000 isk, 100 exotic dancers and 200 crates of spiced wine!
-
It does seem entirely plausible to me. Heck there are probably instances throughout Amarrian history of some petty Holder elevating a subordinate out of spite to try and see them fail. Sort of giving them a horrible little Holding that is rife with problems. The Holder would essentially be washing his hands of the problems by being able to say he put someone else in charge of the area, so if the new little lord or lady fails it's no loss to the Holder and they get the gratification of putting an upstart in their place. Of course if this situation has occurred somewhere in the Empire, then it's possible albeit rare, that the new lord might succeed. For all we know this could be the story behind some of the truly bitter Holder feuds.
There are definitely instances of it. The Ardishapur Family was given the Ammatar Mandate in the hope of seeing Yonis screw it up due to his conservative bent. Of course, the plan failed. (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Yonis_Ardishapur#Ruler_of_the_Ammatar_Mandate)
-
So, it is not an issue when Holders place their slaves on an open, entirely uncontrolled market. It is not an issue when individuals of "all social standing" decide to purchase off that market.
It is, however, an issue when people who don't have Amarrian ideals in mind decide to buy off this open market.
Social or legal status does not matter. Intent, apparently, does. Right... :s
-
That's weird. Amarrian market is strictly regulated (as any baseliner market) and slaves are only to be sold between Holders and slavers.
Since the SCC is CONCORD regulated, the Amarr Empire has very little power on the capsuleer market, where slaves can be sold to anyone.
-
Well, this might look like a paradox situation, but maybe it is. Many Amarrian capsuleers can't probably buy slaves for their own enterprises on the planetsides, Empire-internal markets, as they aren't holders. Still, I'd guess, the Empire would like them to make use of Amarrian station designs etc. which are in a way dependent on slave labour by design (apparently). So, they have to bit the sour apple and allow holders to get some good money for slaves they put on the "open" capsuleer market.
That the 'wrong' people may buy those slaves off the market is the flip side of the payoff equation, I'd guess. So, selling slaves on the open market might not be really a good solution in the Empire's eyes, but one that offers the only available optimum to solve some problems with regard to slave/labour distribution?
Also, since Amarrian holders are under no obligation to sell slaves on the capsuleer market, they do effectively control a large chunk of the slave market that is available for capusleers. And then the Empress could always hand out an edict banning slaves from being sold there. So, the Empire still has a big thumb on that 'free' market - the only thing they can't control is who buys the slaves and what they are doing with it.
But then, if they notice that some EM contact is buying large quantities of slaves off the capsuleer markets of the Mandate, nothing is stopping them to sell loads of slaves there that are firmly indoctrinated in the Amarrian religion and faith and who are prepared to work on spreading that once brought over to the Republic.
-
Since the SCC is CONCORD regulated, the Amarr Empire has very little power on the capsuleer market, where slaves can be sold to anyone.
This seems to be the case with all the markets in every section of space. In my mind, at least, the capsuleer market is almost entirely separated from the baseliner, except in few cases where NPC corps buy/sell from capsuleers. This actually makes sense, because if a capsuleer could manipulate the prices of basic things like foodstuff and planetary vehicles and real estate all it would take is one troll to completely ruin a planet's economy. So we're given a little SCC market to play with while the NPC factions have their own markets to work with; the only times they're linked is when you can buy/sell with NPC corps, mission rewards, LP store purchases, etc.
Case in point, open the reprocessing screen for a faction mod sometime. RF Gyrostabilizer costs a capsuleer around 60 million ISK last I saw, yet it doesn't require 60 million ISK's worth of materials to build; the prices capsuleers pay are determined by other capsuleers, which in turn is determined by the availability of those things. Chances are we have to pay extravagantly for a module most NPC empire ships are probably fit with simply because of the time-grind associated with it on the capsuleer side of business. Slaves are no different either; you can get them from other capsuleers who find them in missions, or from NPC corps. Chances are, selling slaves on the capsuleer market is probably quite lucrative because the seller in question could charge a huge markeup in comparison to selling to other baseliners and get away with it. I could definitely see Holders going through financial troubles putting up slaves on the SCC capsuleer market with this rationale kept in mind.
-
I could definitely see Holders going through financial troubles putting up slaves on the SCC capsuleer market with this rationale kept in mind.
And risk having EM (or a Sansha, or a blooder) buy your slaves? Keep in mind, the Amarr Trade Registry "has records of all transactions within Amarr space and also monitors all foreign trades and investment made within the empire."
Assuming we take the above statement at face value, selling slaves to an enemy of the Empire -is- going to be noticed - and, indeed, again raises some pretty serious questions about why trade of slaves on capsuleer markets is not more heavily limited in the Empire.
If the above statement is incorrect, it seriously needs to be revised - the idea that all trade in the Empire is monitored and regulated is a fundamental concept that a lot of us Amarr types run on, and if that's been ninja-changed out from under us, we'd rather like to know.
-
That's not what I meant. That's perfectly logical for capsuleer markets to be mostly isolated. What is weird is that Amarr authorities allow baseliner sell orders of slaves on the capsuleer market. We can of course find justifications for this, but it just sounds far stretched to me. That they can't do anything for capsuleer trade, sure, but that they can't do anything for their own baseliners going to sell shit on SCC markets, well... Just weird. I don't buy that.
I could definitely see Holders going through financial troubles putting up slaves on the SCC capsuleer market with this rationale kept in mind.
And risk having EM (or a Sansha, or a blooder) buy your slaves? Keep in mind, the Amarr Trade Registry "has records of all transactions within Amarr space and also monitors all foreign trades and investment made within the empire."
Assuming we take the above statement at face value, selling slaves to an enemy of the Empire -is- going to be noticed - and, indeed, again raises some pretty serious questions about why trade of slaves on capsuleer markets is not more heavily limited in the Empire.
If the above statement is incorrect, it seriously needs to be revised - the idea that all trade in the Empire is monitored and regulated is a fundamental concept that a lot of us Amarr types run on, and if that's been ninja-changed out from under us, we'd rather like to know.
The Trade Registry records may well be only about baseliner markets though, but that's not like SCC markets were all about confidentiality either. They must be blind if they do not see that their own corporations are selling tons of slaves here.
EDIT : that's nailing what has been bothering me since the beginning with that Freedom Extension event. That was eventually just a "hey look we took slaves from there and you can't do anything about it since we exploited an obvious loophole that everybody do not even seem to give two shits about". I expected legal issues arising from the Mandate contact and instead only got "We don't know where these slaves come from since they are on capsuleer markets but that's a violation of our territory !".
"Huh what ? Actually, no, buddy. It's not and I can't support you on this."
Actually it makes it interesting in another way since I can thank the Ammatar contact by telling him to shove it and continue playing the incompetent (since that's what the Ammatar have always been good at anyway). Except I won't of course unless I want to commit a factionnal seppuku. "Uhm, hello, I actually think that your Freedom Extension buddies were in their right." :roll:
This whole event renders me completely confused about it eventually, since it's mostly about a capsuleer transfer of slaves like you can make everyday with your RP buddies. Except they would have to face the customs when entering Republic space. So instead they use a NPC actor that can bypass that.
Can I smuggle my drugs through NPC actors to avoid customs too ? :sarcasm:
-
Oh, I agree that it's odd how baseliners in the Empire/Mandate can apparently sell slaves openly and to anyone on the open market; it is mechanically impossible to filter who can buy from you on the market, unfortunately. There might be legal loopholes involved, of course, which allow a Holder selling slaves on the open market to essentially get around any Trade Registry auditing. Remember that the market system in EVE essentially acts like an escrow, a trusted third party if you will. Person A puts something up for sale, and that "something" is kept in the custody of the escrow. Later on Person B deposits money into the escrow service in order to buy that something, and the escrow completes the transaction. If we imagine Person A to be a Holder selling slaves on the SCC market and Person B to be a Blood Raider capsuleer, the Holder could always decry the morals of the SCC. "But I was supposed to be able to trust you!", they might say. And indeed some of them might be genuinely shocked at where their slaves ended up going and face social ostracization from their peers, without facing any formal legal consequences. Others might be in positions of high enough power or desperation to not care. This would certainly go along with the "grimdark" view of New Eden CCP likes to paint.
Of course I'm not the one who's been roleplaying Amarr for years. What do you guys think?
-
To be clear on something, that the Empire has no control over what occurs on the SCC markets is something agreed with even before it was restated in the MIO actor's most recent post - otherwise, wouldn't the Empire surely ban the trading of Khumaaks, pornograhic holoreels, and other unwelcome items in its territory? As an extension of that, I entirely agree that, with the information we have been given, the SCC represents a colossal loophole to the otherwise tightly-controlled Amarr economy.
It is that a loophole of this magnitude exists in the Empire's economy that surprises me. To quote another bit of the Amarr Trade registry description, "The Amarr government seeks to control as many aspects of the daily life of its citizens". So, it's trying to control... except where it doesn't appear to give a hoot?
I mean, wouldn't a loophole this huge be abused colossally? Holders could use it to make unnoticed purchases of weaponry and unbalance the carefully-constructed detente that many rival houses exist in - or they could use it to essentially commit tax fraud, to mask how greatly their Holdings are prospering. I am highly doubtful that the Empire would allow capsuleers to pull any more foundation-stones from the social dynamic of the Empire than they already have.
-
Oh, I agree that it's odd how baseliners in the Empire/Mandate can apparently sell slaves openly and to anyone on the open market; it is mechanically impossible to filter who can buy from you on the market, unfortunately. There might be legal loopholes involved, of course, which allow a Holder selling slaves on the open market to essentially get around any Trade Registry auditing. Remember that the market system in EVE essentially acts like an escrow, a trusted third party if you will. Person A puts something up for sale, and that "something" is kept in the custody of the escrow. Later on Person B deposits money into the escrow service in order to buy that something, and the escrow completes the transaction. If we imagine Person A to be a Holder selling slaves on the SCC market and Person B to be a Blood Raider capsuleer, the Holder could always decry the morals of the SCC. "But I was supposed to be able to trust you!", they might say. And indeed some of them might be genuinely shocked at where their slaves ended up going and face social ostracization from their peers, without facing any formal legal consequences. Others might be in positions of high enough power or desperation to not care. This would certainly go along with the "grimdark" view of New Eden CCP likes to paint.
Of course I'm not the one who's been roleplaying Amarr for years. What do you guys think?
I think that the MIO, or even the TC, would never let baseliners sell slaves on the SCC market, since they don't let them on their own local markets without regulation. Only Holders can buy from slavers and Holders.
If I was in the shoes of the MIO, since I can not regulate SCC markets the same way, I would forbid my baseliners to touch that market even with a 10 inch pole.
-
Thing is, the MIO can't forbid anything. It's there to control that people stay within the laws - the legislative bodies in the Empire are others: Emperor, Heirs, Holders.
I'm pretty damn sure that not just everyone in the Empire can sell to the SCC markets and expect that access to that market is quite controlled for the huge majority of people in the Empire, if not outright impossible. That doesn't mean, though, that some holders might not be legally within their bounds if they sell 'huge' quantities of slaves on those markets. That it might be frowned upon by conservative elements might not have much of an impact on the legality issue.
-
I mean, wouldn't a loophole this huge be abused colossally? Holders could use it to make unnoticed purchases of weaponry and unbalance the carefully-constructed detente that many rival houses exist in - or they could use it to essentially commit tax fraud, to mask how greatly their Holdings are prospering. I am highly doubtful that the Empire would allow capsuleers to pull any more foundation-stones from the social dynamic of the Empire than they already have.
Probably it is true that Holders will buy from SCC in secret, like they employ capsuleers for their causes and wars. I believe that the MIO is more concerned on controlling the market for normal people, who probably can't access the SCC, than for the elites.
-
I'd expect you needed a license in order to use the SCC markets, as a regular run-of-the-mill Holder.
Easier to get for people who actually have a need for it (companies with large quantities of imports/exports from off-planet/station, Holders whose domain spans multiple celestial bodies, etc.), harder for people who don't.
-
Game mechanics, of allowing anyone to buy/sell anything anywhere, may be unnecessarily complicating the discussion.
E.g. you can be the Amarr militia's leading pilot and can buy/sell things in Pator.
Including slaves.